Rating: 16/23 Batch B2/19 - 55.8% OK, I've heard great things about this. I don't think I loved the regular Redbreast 12 (which I'm fairly sure I tried), but I've enjoyed some Redbreast offerings, though I'm not sure I've yet found one that was good VFM. N: Well, it's a heck of a lot richer and more interesting than the Kilbeggans I've tried, but that's one low bar. I get spicy wood showcasing cinnamon and pepper, mixed with some orange, light tart apricot, lemon, and apple. The wood actually has some nice toasted grain and a fairly aged must to it like one would find in moderately old bourbons. I can't help but feel though that this nose would have been so much better had sherry casks been used at some point in here. I do get some substantial vanilla with something floral as well. It's very balanced with American oak influences, but I'm not sure that that choice of oak will be enough to make for a really impressive palate. P: I get a surprising bubblegum flavor in this (though not as much as in Green Spot) mixed with some rich, toasty wood and punchy spices. I do get some fruit coming through, with lemon first, followed by orange, and a bit of apricot. The spices are there in spades, showcasing lots of cinnamon, some pepper, and also ginger. It's a nicely balanced palate, I suppose, but it isn't terribly rich, complex, and hedonistic. The balance is solid enough and the flavors that are there are indeed well executed, but it's kind of boring and while it has some very mature elements, the lemon (presumably from the non-barley grain component) makes it taste kind of young. It's not a bad palate, but I don't find it terribly impressive. It reminds me a bit of how Appleton Estate 12 has this great mature woodiness, but it's all concentrated in one dimension. In contrast, Yellow Spot succeeds because of its finishing, which adds some much needed rich, sweet fruitiness and additional dimensions. F: The spicy burn lingers for a bit, along with the fruit (starring lemon more than ever), and a little bit of the wood, including toasty grain and vanilla. I can appreciate this as a mix of malt and grain with some decent complexity, but I don't really enjoy drinking it. For the money, there are just better options out there. I really wanted to love this, but I don't. I don't regret having it on my shelf, though it is a bit pricy for something that I'm so disinterested in. Yellow Spot is richer and more complex with more of that Irish oiliness. It's also less harsh and tastes more mature despite being the same age. I can imagine sipping Yellow Spot awhile, whereas this is quite aggressive and comparatively simple. I think I would take this over Green Spot since Green Spot has kind of this mild, bland, cotton candy vibe, but mostly what I'm tasting here is bourbon barrels (or some other kind of bland, spicy oak) and grain whiskey. It just isn't that appealing. I do get some of those Irish fruity flavors out of this, but it's mainly sultana. reading the back of the bottle, it says I should be getting apricot and now when I taste it and really wait for the finish, I do get some, but it isn't that rich, elegant apricot stands out as a delightful, decadent flavor on its own. This is sadly kind of bland. Side by side with RR 10 to compare the bourbon flavor with a kind of light bourbon, this is less rich and less complex. It's also harsher, which makes sense with the higher ABV, but honestly I'd take the RR 10 any day. This is better than Green Spot, but still it isn't good enough to justify its price by a fair margin. Sometimes the CS releases use better barrels or different aging or finishing or something, but this just tastes like they didn't water it down. What a disappointment. This is nowhere near the level of Yellow Spot. For $40, I wouldn't be unhappy with this, but $50 starts pushing it. This has more alcohol than Yellow Spot 12 and it has less of that pot still oiliness, so if either of those are objectives, this succeeds. It might also have a more floral flavor, but it's possible that I'm just tasting the tartness and minerals exaggerating that element. Yellow Spot is certainly more subtle, but also far more complex. Still, there are moments where I think that this is much closer in quality than I usually do. I keep going back and forth on whether I like this or Green Spot better. Right now, I appreciate how smooth Green Spot is with some nice sweetness and lack of oiliness, but it is a lower proof and this isn't particularly oily either. There's a lot less age and a lot more cotton candy and bubblegum in Green Spot as well, so I'm leaning toward this, particularly since there is some level at which the water tones down the sharpness and brings out more apricot. I think that this cask strength offering is a bit above the optimal proof, but I can add some water to optimize. The regular Redbreast 12 is pretty close in quality to Green Spot and this is better than that, but I wouldn't call this a massive improvement. This is probably 1-2 points better than the regular Redbreast 12 and it certainly isn't as good as Yellow Spot. A nice finishing barrel would have done this wonders, as the Redbreast Lustau shows. To see if this assertion might hold any water, I tried adding a drop of tawny port to one glass of this and a drop of LBV port to another (because those were what I had on hand). The tawny port left me pretty mixed, so I might try again with a better tawny, but I wouldn't say that just any tawny will improve this. The LBV on the other hand was a pretty clear - albeit slight - improvement. It seems like a quality port or sherry and some time to marry could do wonders for this whiskey. I'll have to try adding a drop of my Lustau oloroso after I open it to see if that improves the flavor. I get more fruit and fullness than in regular Redbreast 12 with some more integrated flavors and the oily layer fits in well. There is some alcohol, but it isn't excessive. This is definitely a substantial step up. Is it amazing though? No. Still, just a little bit of water really brings out the fruit complexity here without making it too watered down. It still isn't the decadent fruity whiskey that I want, but it's better. I'm thinking in the 15 to 17 range. I started at 15, then moved to 17, then returned to 16. I think 16 makes the most sense because this is a solid improvement over the regular 12 and is a darned fine sipper, but it isn't anywhere near staggering, much like the likes of Roku gin. Actually, let me do a side by side with that. Hmm, the rich, fullness here is definitely better, but there's also more alcohol, harshness, and bitterness. Roku is softer and more delicate with lots of floral and herbal complexity and balance. I know though that while very good, Roku is not among the most complex drinks out there, which suggests that my impressions of this that indicated brashness and an in-your-face character were not totally off base. While I do still think that this deserves a 16, I don't think that it is obviously better and there is a slight chance that it might not be as good, so I can't give it that 17. 16 it is. I didn't expect to end on this comparison, but there it is. What? This was aged in sherry casks?! How did they end up with this profile then?! There's so little resembling sherry here. I really just thought I was tasting fruit from bourbon barrels and the grain. I guess that the apricot and sultana are probably suggestions of sherry, but they sure don't add much complexity. I'm sure glad that this wasn't released without using sherry barrels. There sure isn't enough sherry in this. Maybe it's not one of the better batches.